Share

FIDH/Reuters

In the final hearing of a group of people collectively known as the "UAE 94", the Federal Supreme Court of Abu Dhabi sentenced [on 2 July 2013] 56 people, including prominent human rights lawyers Mohammed Al-Roken and Mohammed Al-Mansoori, to 10 years in prison.

Eight others were sentenced in absentia to fifteen years; and five defendants were sentenced to seven years. The court acquitted 25 defendants, including all 13 women among the accused. The defendants were charged with, among other things, association with a group aiming to overthrow the country's political system. Many of those sentenced are members of a local group, al-Islah, which has been engaged in peaceful political debate for many years.

A coalition of NGOs including FIDH, the Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR), the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) and the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI) published today the second and final report of the judicial observation of the trial, which the groups call deeply flawed.

The report is being released as news emerged yesterday [26 August 2013] from prison that some of those jailed in the case began a hunger strike on 31 July, with 20 detainees participating to protest the mistreatment they continue to be subjected to while in detention. Among those on hunger strike is human rights lawyer Dr Mohammed Al-Mansoori, whose shoulder has been dislocated in prison.

The coalition mandated British human rights lawyer Melanie Gingell, a member of GCHR's Advisory Board, to observe the trial which started on 4 March and ended on 2 July 2013. Ms. Gingell was denied access to three hearings despite her compliance with the official regulations and procedures. The content of the report is based on information gathered through interviews conducted by Ms. Gingell with family members who attended the hearings, local human rights defenders and activists, as well as international and local media.

The report, entitled United Arab Emirates: Criminalising Dissent, UAE 94 Trial Deeply Flawed, outlines how the trial of the UAE 94 was marred by recurrent and serious breaches of internationally agreed standards of fair trial, and led to unfair convictions and the imposition of lengthy terms of imprisonment for 69 of the defendants, without giving them the right to appeal the harsh sentences. The four organisations further stress that most of the defendants were tried for exercising their legitimate rights to freedom of association and expression.

“Judicial procedures sanctioning fundamental, legitimate human rights such as freedom of expression and association are unfair. All of those convicted solely on the basis of exercising these rights should be freed and the charges against them dropped,” stated Karim Lahidji, FIDH President.

As the UAE authorities refused to grant access to independent observers and international media, they also cracked down on families of the defendants who published information about the trial through social media. On 8 April 2013, Abdullah Al-Hadidi, the son of a defendant, was sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment for tweeting that allegations of torture (within the trial) should be investigated.

“The complete blackout about the trial except through local media and the subsequent crackdown on the families of the defendants for denouncing fair trial violations were reported throughout the proceedings. The coverage by local media which published a series of prejudicial articles clearly demonstrates the political interference into these judicial proceedings,” declared Gamal Eid, Executive Director of the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI).

The information collected by the observer led to the conclusion that the court was not independent and free to conduct the trial in a proper manner. Most of the basic principles and fair trial guarantees, as documented in the report, were violated.

“The entire process of the trial did not meet basic international human rights standards, which has consequently led to an unfair trial and unjust sentences,” stated Khalid Ibrahim, Director of the Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR).

The four organisations are further dismayed by the court's dismissal of the torture allegations that were repeatedly reported by the defendants. The UAE authorities have an international legal obligation to duly investigate these serious allegations of torture; failing to do so is a serious breach of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ratified by the UAE in July 2012.

The four organisations call upon the UAE authorities to initiate an immediate, thorough and impartial investigation into the allegations of torture, in addition to an independent inquiry into the conduct of the trial of the UAE 94. “We demand that charges against all those convicted solely on the basis of exercising their legitimate rights be dropped and that those imprisoned be released pending the outcome of the inquiry,” said Ziad Abdel Tawab, deputy director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS).

In June 2013, during the Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council, the UAE authorities vowed to guarantee fundamental human rights. FIDH, GCHR, CIHRS and ANHRI urge the UAE authorities to keep their promises and invite the UN Special Rapporteurs on torture, on freedom of expression and opinion and on the independence of judges and lawyers to visit the UAE and grant them access to those convicted in this case and particularly those who reported torture. The UAE must demonstrate to the international community that it is willing to take immediate measures to guarantee its compliance with its international legal obligations.

Although invalidated through a unanimous repeal by the Egyptian Parliament in 1928, the Assembly Law continues to be unlawfully exploited in tandem with the notorious Protest Law, passed in November 2013.

During the year, the ruling National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) junta curtailed the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly through repressive laws such the Referendum Act, the Computer Crime Act, and article 116 of the penal code on sedition, as well as NCPO orders censoring media and preventing public gatherings of more than five people.

The murder of popular political commentator Kem Ley, who had voiced many criticisms of the government, on 10 July 2016, remains unanswered. Authorities systematically denied Cambodians their right to peaceful assembly by suppressing protests and issuing a series of ad hoc bans on non-violent gatherings and processions.

Restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and assembly persist, amid the government's failure to contend with the range of rights-abusing laws that have been long used to criminalize free speech and prosecute dissidents.As part of the military's "clearance operations" in northern Rakhine State, where thousands of Rohingya Muslims face rampant and systemic human rights violations, the authorities denied independent journalists access to the region since early October.

Events at recent demonstrations and protests indicate that the fundamental freedoms of expression and assembly in the Kingdom of Cambodia are facing ever-greater interference and restriction at the hands of local and national authorities.

Violence against journalists in Europe increased in the second quarter of 2016, reports submitted to Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom platform show, as a government crackdown in Turkey intensified and protests turned violent in countries from France to Finland.

The government uses draconian laws such as the sedition provisions of the penal code, the criminal defamation law, and laws dealing with hate speech to silence dissent. These laws are vaguely worded, overly broad, and prone to misuse, and have been repeatedly used for political purposes against critics at the national and state level.

In recent years, the space afforded to civil society to operate freely has been shrinking dramatically across the world, presenting a serious threat to democracy and human rights. Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA) have been especially badly affected by this shrinking political space.

The first months of 2014 saw a continuation of the political unrest that rocked the capital city of Phnom Penh in the months following the disputed July 2013 national elections. Political protests continued throughout the city in 2014 as the opposition Cambodian National Rescue Party (CNRP) boycotted its National Assembly seats over alleged widespread irregularities in the previous year’s election, which maintained control of the legislative body under the Cambodian People’s Party, and its long-ruling leader Prime Minister Hun Sen, who in 2014 marked 30 years as head of state.

This 140-page report documents lax government enforcement of labor laws and brand actions that hinder monitoring and compliance. In recent years, wage protests, instances of garment workers fainting, and burdensome union registration procedures have spotlighted the plight of workers in Cambodia’s garment factories.

This report documents 45 cases from Caracas and three states, involving more than 150 victims, in which security forces have abused the rights of protesters and other people in the vicinity of demonstrations.

The 100-page report shows that Tibetan refugee communities in Nepal are now facing a de facto ban on political protests, sharp restrictions on public activities promoting Tibetan culture and religion, and routine abuses by Nepali security forces.

The Turkish authorities severely restricted the right to freedom of expression of journalists and writers during and after the Gezi Park protests in 2013, English PEN and PEN International said in their joint report.

This factsheet provides an overview of the recent rubbish collectors’ protests and subsequent negotiations with garbage collection company CINTRI. The strike for an increased minimum wage and improved working conditions went ahead in spite of the current ban on all demonstrations, assemblies and marches, and remained peaceful, despite heavy military police presence

This Briefing Note addresses the increasing practice of forcing human rights defenders, protesters and everyday citizens to sign written statements agreeing to not partake in future demonstrations or illegal activities, as a condition of their release or to avoid charges

Charges against dozens of protesters in connection with the protest on the eve of President Vladimir Putin’s 2012 inauguration are "inappropriate" and "disproportionate," according to a panel of independent experts. Twenty seven people are facing "mass rioting" charges in connection with the protest on May 6, 2012.

There is some skepticism about how much influence Burma's youth movement can assert in terms of political change. Still, activists have benefited from greater access to the Internet, which has brought a new side to the online community after decades of heavy censorship

The report documents case after case in which police, the paramilitary Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), and the Border Guards Bangladesh (BGB) opened fire into crowds or beat protesters in a brutal and unlawful manner

IFEX publishes original and member-produced free expression news and reports. Some member content has been edited by IFEX. We invite you to contact media@ifex.org to request permission to reproduce or republish in whole or in part content from this site.